This has to be the biggest load of crap she has ever espoused since the Q&A bs about Islam being the most feminist religion ....

The Oil & Gas Industry must be losing the plot asking her to speak at their forums.

Quote:

She said behavioural scientists had attributed the explosion on the BP-operated Deepwater Horizon rig to groupthink and confirmation bias among key ­decision-makers in the lead up to the explosion that killed 11 ­people.

“Was there anyone else around the table who thought differently and who didn’t just think differently, but was included enough and was valued enough so their different perspective was valued, to actually challenge that bias?” she said.

“Everyone around the table came from a similar world and a similar perspective. They all thought the same. They all cared about the same things. And so we ended with one of the worst ­tragedies in our industry.

“And I often wonder, if there was someone around that table who was different, who thought differently but was valued as equally as everybody else, who could challenge that groupthink and challenge that confirmation bias, would things have ended differently?”

Absolute wank babble.

Here's a little gem she's used ... that said by a white person in a different context would be called racism or bigotry.

Quote:

“So I pretended to be a ­middle-aged white bloke,” she said to laughter, describing how she would swear and swagger like her male colleagues until she ­realised this was “reinforcing the existing culture”.

She said behavioural scientists had attributed the explosion on the BP-operated Deepwater Horizon rig to groupthink and confirmation bias among key ­decision-makers in the lead up to the explosion that killed 11 ­people.

That bit is correct. If she thinks more ethnic diversity would have helped she is deluding herself. Crap like that happens regularly in China and India. We used to get upset if 100 people died. That we now get wound up over this sort of incident on the other side of the world just proves how rapidly our workplace culture is changing. She is the epitome of the empty-headed groupthink she is blaming.

She said behavioural scientists had attributed the explosion on the BP-operated Deepwater Horizon rig to groupthink and confirmation bias among key ­decision-makers in the lead up to the explosion that killed 11 ­people.

That bit is correct. If she thinks more ethnic diversity would have helped she is deluding herself. Crap like that happens regularly in China and India. We used to get upset if 100 people died. That we now get wound up over this sort of incident on the other side of the world just proves how rapidly our workplace culture is changing. She is the epitome of the empty-headed groupthink she is blaming.

Where did she even slightly allude to ethnic diversity?

Are you merely assuming that's what she meant because she's ethnic? And therefore "the epitome of the empty-headed groupthink she is blaming"?

This has to be the biggest load of crap she has ever espoused since the Q&A bs about Islam being the most feminist religion ....

The Oil & Gas Industry must be losing the plot asking her to speak at their forums.

Quote:

She said behavioural scientists had attributed the explosion on the BP-operated Deepwater Horizon rig to groupthink and confirmation bias among key ­decision-makers in the lead up to the explosion that killed 11 ­people.

“Was there anyone else around the table who thought differently and who didn’t just think differently, but was included enough and was valued enough so their different perspective was valued, to actually challenge that bias?” she said.

“Everyone around the table came from a similar world and a similar perspective. They all thought the same. They all cared about the same things. And so we ended with one of the worst ­tragedies in our industry.

“And I often wonder, if there was someone around that table who was different, who thought differently but was valued as equally as everybody else, who could challenge that groupthink and challenge that confirmation bias, would things have ended differently?”

Absolute wank babble.

Here's a little gem she's used ... that said by a white person in a different context would be called racism or bigotry.

Quote:

“So I pretended to be a ­middle-aged white bloke,” she said to laughter, describing how she would swear and swagger like her male colleagues until she ­realised this was “reinforcing the existing culture”.

This has to be the biggest load of crap she has ever espoused since the Q&A bs about Islam being the most feminist religion ....

The Oil & Gas Industry must be losing the plot asking her to speak at their forums.

Quote:

She said behavioural scientists had attributed the explosion on the BP-operated Deepwater Horizon rig to groupthink and confirmation bias among key ­decision-makers in the lead up to the explosion that killed 11 ­people.

“Was there anyone else around the table who thought differently and who didn’t just think differently, but was included enough and was valued enough so their different perspective was valued, to actually challenge that bias?” she said.

“Everyone around the table came from a similar world and a similar perspective. They all thought the same. They all cared about the same things. And so we ended with one of the worst ­tragedies in our industry.

“And I often wonder, if there was someone around that table who was different, who thought differently but was valued as equally as everybody else, who could challenge that groupthink and challenge that confirmation bias, would things have ended differently?”

Absolute wank babble.

Here's a little gem she's used ... that said by a white person in a different context would be called racism or bigotry.

Quote:

“So I pretended to be a ­middle-aged white bloke,” she said to laughter, describing how she would swear and swagger like her male colleagues until she ­realised this was “reinforcing the existing culture”.

Well i don't automatically think ethnic diversity. I think of people (who, let's face it, are probably white men) who have similar interests. Those interests were probably economic.

Perhaps if they had a couple of scientists on the board? Some advocates for the people likely to be effected? An oceanographer or two? Marine biologists? Or the people that actually built the damn thing?

I dont think she's necessarily wrong in that short explanation, but in practice, diversity of opinion is the only type of diversity that is helpful, but also the only type that is discouraged.

I'm more ""interested in "pretending to be a middle aged white bloke" and why these sorts of efforts fail, especially when coming from lefties.

From Jönathon Haidts book "the righteous mind:

Quote:

In a study I did with Jesse Graham and Brian Nosek, we tested how well liberals and conservatives could understand each other. We asked more than two thousand American visitors to fill out the Moral Foundations Qyestionnaire. One-third of the time they were asked to fill it out normally, answering as themselves. One-third of the time they were asked to fill it out as they think a “typical liberal” would respond. One-third of the time they were asked to fill it out as a “typical conservative” would respond. This design allowed us to examine the stereotypes that each side held about the other. More important, it allowed us to assess how accurate they were by comparing people’s expectations about “typical” partisans to the actual responses from partisans on the left and the right)’ Who was best able to pretend to be the other?

The results were clear and consistent. Moderates and conservatives were most accurate in their predictions, whether they were pretending to be liberals or conservatives. Liberals were the least accurate, especially those who described themselves as “very liberal.” The biggest errors in the whole study came when liberals answered the Care and Fairness questions while pretending to be conservatives. When faced with questions such as “One of the worst things a person could do is hurt a defenseless animal” or ”Justice is the most important requirement for a society,” liberals assumed that conservatives would disagree. If you have a moral matrix built primarily on intuitions about care and fairness (as equality), and you listen to the Reagan [i.e., conservative] narrative, what else could you think? Reagan seems completely unconcerned about the welfare of drug addicts, poor people, and gay people. He’s more interested in fighting wars and telling people how to run their sex lives.

If you don’t see that Reagan is pursuing positive values of Loyalty, Authority, and Sanctity, you almost have to conclude that Republicans see no positive value in Care and Fairness. You might even go as far as Michael Feingold, a theater critic for the liberal newspaper the Village Voice, when he wrote:

Republicans don’t believe in the imagination, partly because so few of them have one, but mostly because it gets in the way of their chosen work, which is to destroy the human race and the planet. Human beings, who have imaginations, can see a recipe for disaster in the making; Republicans, whose goal in life is to profit from disaster and who don’t give a hoot about human beings, either can’t or won’t. Which is why I personally think they should be exterminated before they causeany more harm)3

One of the many ironies in this quotation is that it shows the inability of a theater critic-who skillfully enters fantastical imaginary worlds for a living-to imagine that Republicans act within a moral matrix that differs from his own. Morality binds and blinds.

In short, liberals just dont understand diverse opinions, so any attempt to pretend to be anything but a liberal, is going to be inauthentic and erroneous. This also explains why any nuanced opinion differing from the mainstream is always hilariously misrepresented to the point of absurdity.

Test this on this forum - think safe schools is flawed? Well thats clearly becasue you hate children and gays, and want them all dead.

Yes of course. Scientists and academics are synonymous with deluded hippies.

Ethnically diverse deluded hippies, i hope.

Scientists and academics are probably the least appropriate people for a board. They are specialists. A board member has to consider the broadest possible range of issues. It is the closest thing to being a politician in the private sector. If they don't have scientists on the board, it is because no scientists were qualified for the job. You don't need scientists on the board to get their advice.

Yes of course. Scientists and academics are synonymous with deluded hippies.

Ethnically diverse deluded hippies, i hope.

Scientists and academics are probably the least appropriate people for a board. They are specialists. A board member has to consider the broadest possible range of issues. It is the closest thing to being a politician in the private sector. If they don't have scientists on the board, it is because no scientists were qualified for the job. You don't need scientists on the board to get their advice.

You utterly contradict yourself. But you know that, right?

In any event, your first post in this thread was to agree with Yassmin about the need for diversity on the board.